The legislative elections are only two months from now. Voters will choose their candidate, with the districts' needs first in their mind, but given the results of previous legislative elections, the nation's interests may be of greater importance to them.
Over the last eight years some good work has been done. But the list of problems recently named by the president is much greater. Another four years of this and Taiwan would be weakened probably beyond repair.
In the 1990s, the Legislative Yuan changed after changes were made to the Constitution. It gained wide authority in the development of democracy in Taiwan. It is time to change again. The numbers of seats will be halved, the effects of which are difficult to predict. The larger number of districts may well have some influence on the legislature.
In the past, the KMT held the majority, which made it much more knowledgeable in directing its elections -- as did its considerable assets. Times have changed, as have the people and the KMT's budget. That makes the outcome of the elections even more unpredictable.
If, after the next elections, the legislature is still controlled by one party, while the presidency is controlled by another, Taiwan's problems will continue and pressure for democratic change might increase.
If, on the other hand, the Legislative Yuan and the presidency are controlled by the same party, the nation will see either a continued fight to keep its sovereignty or a gradual move toward China.
The media is focusing on the presidential election, not the legislature. That is not unusual in democratic countries. Many countries have legislative and presidential elections at the same time.
Some do not have strong legislatures and focus little on their legislative elections. But considering how wide the differences between the two main parties are, the legislative election is clearly crucial.
The DPP and KMT have three months after the legislative election to campaign for the presidency. The DPP and KMT have party platforms, but neither of them has delivered an election platform. Reaching consensus within a party on an election platform is difficult in any democratic country. Given the strong differences between the nation's two main parties, the voters will need all the information they can get in the next two elections, which will have a clear impact on their future.
The DPP has an election disadvantage of having a lame duck president. Frank Hsieh (
Taiwan is also apparently suffering a lack of urgency in gathering and supporting candidates for the legislative districts. For the DPP, the legislative elections are especially key.
In the KMT, some surprising moves have caught media attention.
The party presented a draft mission statement without any mention of the "one China" policy or the "1992 consensus." Senior party leaders, including presidential candidate Ma Ying-jeou (
Media reports, however, claim that many KMT members are concerned that harping on unification is limiting public support for the party.
It makes it abundantly clear that the party hopes for unification with China.
Negative public reactions to this clearly indicate that voters disagree with the KMT's guiding principles.
As the presidential campaigning heats up, relatively little is being done to highlight the significance of the legislature. Both camps recognize that the public must agree on the nation's future, but few people are paying attention.
Nat Bellocchi is a former chairman of the American Institute in Taiwan and a special adviser to the Liberty Times Group. The views expressed in this article are his own.
In their recent op-ed “Trump Should Rein In Taiwan” in Foreign Policy magazine, Christopher Chivvis and Stephen Wertheim argued that the US should pressure President William Lai (賴清德) to “tone it down” to de-escalate tensions in the Taiwan Strait — as if Taiwan’s words are more of a threat to peace than Beijing’s actions. It is an old argument dressed up in new concern: that Washington must rein in Taipei to avoid war. However, this narrative gets it backward. Taiwan is not the problem; China is. Calls for a so-called “grand bargain” with Beijing — where the US pressures Taiwan into concessions
The term “assassin’s mace” originates from Chinese folklore, describing a concealed weapon used by a weaker hero to defeat a stronger adversary with an unexpected strike. In more general military parlance, the concept refers to an asymmetric capability that targets a critical vulnerability of an adversary. China has found its modern equivalent of the assassin’s mace with its high-altitude electromagnetic pulse (HEMP) weapons, which are nuclear warheads detonated at a high altitude, emitting intense electromagnetic radiation capable of disabling and destroying electronics. An assassin’s mace weapon possesses two essential characteristics: strategic surprise and the ability to neutralize a core dependency.
Chinese President and Chinese Communist Party (CCP) Chairman Xi Jinping (習近平) said in a politburo speech late last month that his party must protect the “bottom line” to prevent systemic threats. The tone of his address was grave, revealing deep anxieties about China’s current state of affairs. Essentially, what he worries most about is systemic threats to China’s normal development as a country. The US-China trade war has turned white hot: China’s export orders have plummeted, Chinese firms and enterprises are shutting up shop, and local debt risks are mounting daily, causing China’s economy to flag externally and hemorrhage internally. China’s
US President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) were born under the sign of Gemini. Geminis are known for their intelligence, creativity, adaptability and flexibility. It is unlikely, then, that the trade conflict between the US and China would escalate into a catastrophic collision. It is more probable that both sides would seek a way to de-escalate, paving the way for a Trump-Xi summit that allows the global economy some breathing room. Practically speaking, China and the US have vulnerabilities, and a prolonged trade war would be damaging for both. In the US, the electoral system means that public opinion
RSS